Apple wins EU-wide ban on Galaxy Tab 7.7; Tab 10.1N not covered

Samsung Germany is just an arm of Samsung Korea, says the German appeals court.

Samsung has taken another hit from Apple in Europe thanks to an appeals court in Germany. The court ruled on Tuesday morning that the Galaxy Tab 7.7 indeed infringes upon Apple's design patent for the iPad, and banned it from sale across the EU. The Galaxy Tab 10.1N, however, managed to make its way through the cracks, with the court allowing it to be sold in Germany.

The Galaxy Tab 7.7 had already been banned from sale in Germany thanks to a decision from a lower court in late 2011. At that time, the court treated Samsung Germany as a separate entity from Samsung in Korea; the latter was able to continue selling the tablet throughout the rest of Europe. This was reversed on Tuesday when the Duesseldorf High Court decided that Samsung Germany was instead a local branch of the Korean company, resulting in the EU-wide ban. According to a statement released by the court, the Galaxy Tab 7.7 infringes upon Apple's registered EU Community Design for the iPad.

But Samsung didn't lose entirely. The appeals court also upheld a previous ruling that the Galaxy Tab 10.1N—the larger of Samsung's two tablets—had indeed been sufficiently changed from the original Tab 10.1 design, therefore differentiating it enough from the iPad. The original Tab 10.1 had been banned in Germany last year for looking too much like Apple's iPad Community Design; Samsung eventually changed the look of the front and slapped an "N" on the device's name, qualifying it for sale in Germany.

Samsung vowed to continue fighting Apple, despite its win with the Tab 10.1N. "Samsung is disappointed with the court’s ruling. We will continue to take all available measures, including legal action, to protect our intellectual property rights and defend against Apple’s claims to ensure our products remain available to consumers throughout the European Union," the company said in a statement.

So they ban the one that isn't even the same size as the iPad?I think this is the German sense of humor at work.

Sizes are not relevant to designs. Just like the design of the coke bottle is irrespective of the volume of liquid they contain, or like Porshe designs cover everything from matchbox sized cars up to real ones.

I would love to see how close one could get in likeliness without infringing on their "community design" or design in general, and honestly I think it should be a requirement in such filings and/or litigation. If we know exactly where someone will cut of from being "too close" in design then these kind of cases will be much more straight forward, it will also give an indication if the "community design" is overly broad or not.

I know I know, that would be logic and common sense to do such a thing, and it seems that the (corporate) world is fighting to banish those.

So they ban the one that isn't even the same size as the iPad?I think this is the German sense of humor at work.

Sizes are not relevant to designs. Just like the design of the coke bottle is irrespective of the volume of liquid they contain, or like Porshe designs cover everything from matchbox sized cars up to real ones.

Car designs? Really?

What planet did you just arrive from and do you have any interesting technology to share?

So they ban the one that isn't even the same size as the iPad?I think this is the German sense of humor at work.

Sizes are not relevant to designs. Just like the design of the coke bottle is irrespective of the volume of liquid they contain, or like Porshe designs cover everything from matchbox sized cars up to real ones.

I can see how that is relevant to Porsche, but the iPad? No way, no how. A different beast alltogether. My printer has a 4' touch screen that actually kinda looks like a tablet, should that be banned too?

The iPad only runs iOS. The Galaxy Tab 7.7 only runs Android, and is a very different size.What confusion?

OS is irrelevant. Apple has protection of the *shape*. Even though their "slim rectangle with rounded corners" has a different for factor, Samsung's "slim rectangle with rounded corners" is apparently similar enough to warrant a ban.You can discuss the validity of design protections. Some companies like B&O relied heavily on them for protection. Obviously B&O never sought to patent a "slim rectangle with rounded corners"

Huh, that's funny - I've seen plenty of TVs that look like that and Samsung has yet to bring those companies to court. I bet they could recover all the money they're losing in their battle with Apple if they did so...

Huh, that's funny - I've seen plenty of TVs that look like that and Samsung has yet to bring those companies to court. I bet they could recover all the money they're losing in their battle with Apple if they did so...

Do you know for sure that Samsung did not threaten to sue other companies over their TV designs?

Huh, that's funny - I've seen plenty of TVs that look like that and Samsung has yet to bring those companies to court. I bet they could recover all the money they're losing in their battle with Apple if they did so...

maybe that's because no other company is trying to ban the sale of their devices... apple attacked first..

So I wonder why Apple get hailed as the more successful company...wouldn't Apple actually be the more risky long term investment?

Not so long as they keep building superior hardware (and you know they will). The iPhone 4S is a year old and still no one has built a smartphone with comparable graphics and screen. A year old...that's millenia in the mobile space.

maybe that's because no other company is trying to ban the sale of their devices... apple attacked first..

The TV manufacturers have been suing themselves silly for years now. Sharp, Panasonic, Samsung, LG all locked in patent litigation even before the iPod. You all should read more than just computer tech sites before making such wide ranging statements.

So I wonder why Apple get hailed as the more successful company...wouldn't Apple actually be the more risky long term investment?

Not so long as they keep building superior hardware (and you know they will). The iPhone 4S is a year old and still no one has built a smartphone with comparable graphics and screen. A year old...that's millenia in the mobile space.

So I wonder why Apple get hailed as the more successful company...wouldn't Apple actually be the more risky long term investment?

Not so long as they keep building superior hardware (and you know they will). The iPhone 4S is a year old and still no one has built a smartphone with comparable graphics and screen. A year old...that's millenia in the mobile space.

Apple's superior hardware is always laughable to hear about.

When it's nearly a year old, in particular! Makes it downright ridiculous.

So I wonder why Apple get hailed as the more successful company...wouldn't Apple actually be the more risky long term investment?

Not so long as they keep building superior hardware (and you know they will). The iPhone 4S is a year old and still no one has built a smartphone with comparable graphics and screen. A year old...that's millenia in the mobile space.

Samsung just needs to make their tablets a little less similar, like they did for the 10.1N which was now given the go ahead by the court.

This is no problem with the patents themselves.

The exact same argument can be said for the Knight Ridder tablet. Apple stole their design. I don't see them banning Apple sales though. The judge in "the case where the lawyer couldn't tell the two apart from 15 feet" basically changed his story. He admitted that they looked alike because he didn't understand the technology. This is just more bogus crap from Apple.

The interesting part: IAFAIK, in the UK and in The Netherlands judges have found in first instance that the 7.7 does not infringe.

So a German Judge know to judge favourably for rightsholders now bans sale in other EU countries where local judges have found these products to not be infringing?

I live in the EU, and I hate the ongoing transfer of our sovereign powers to this monstrosity. Since we already have a crisi, cant we just use it to let that useless burocracy die and start over? Get rid of the EURO while at it, since a single currency in an area that does not have the necesary (and unwanted, so thank god for that) level of political integration is a disaster waiting to happen.

So I wonder why Apple get hailed as the more successful company...wouldn't Apple actually be the more risky long term investment?

Not so long as they keep building superior hardware (and you know they will). The iPhone 4S is a year old and still no one has built a smartphone with comparable graphics and screen. A year old...that's millenia in the mobile space.

I very much doubt this. Indeed, Jacqui, could you please cite a source to support the last part of this statement?

Quote:

The court ruled on Tuesday morning that the Galaxy Tab 7.7 indeed infringes upon Apple's design patent for the iPad, and banned it from sale across the EU

European countries still don't have a European-wide patent system (or even consistent in its regulations), nor a European wide lower-courts system. To get such a ban, it would have to be edicted by a European union organization, not a simple German court.

In fact, I can still find this tablet for sale at a variety of European online retailers, including amazon.fr.

How is a smaller company possibly able to market a product if they are forced to have an army of lawyers to defend against ridiculous design patent lawsuits filed worldwide? Or develop a business plan when you might be able to sell in one country but not another? The coke bottle's shape is very unique. A rectangle is not, be it a TV or a tablet or a phone.

How is a smaller company possibly able to market a product if they are forced to have an army of lawyers to defend against ridiculous design patent lawsuits filed worldwide? Or develop a business plan when you might be able to sell in one country but not another? The coke bottle's shape is very unique. A rectangle is not, be it a TV or a tablet or a phone.

I think this is the frustration - because companies like Apple are so litigious it makes it very hard if not impossible for another "Apple" to start-up. What started in a garage is something in the past - you need to be bought by another company in order for your new product to make any headway...

So I wonder why Apple get hailed as the more successful company...wouldn't Apple actually be the more risky long term investment?

Not so long as they keep building superior hardware (and you know they will). The iPhone 4S is a year old and still no one has built a smartphone with comparable graphics and screen. A year old...that's millenia in the mobile space.

Technically the 4S is almost 9.5 months old rather than a full year old, but yes, it's hardware has remained quite relevant (particularly thanks to the PowerVR SGX543). That said, I'd personally take a 4.8" SAMOLED HD screen over a 3.5" IPS LCD any day simply because of screen size.